id have to disagree (being a starfighter fanboy) but in all onesty the havoc is a better fighter and bomber lest put it this way 4 if not 5 firepower 2 crew a bomb (maybe 2) and turret slot with 1 agility 4 hull and shield with agility hull and shield all being increased by 1 for nym not to mention with nym the crew replaced with astromech thats right 2 astromechs and lets not forget the the havoc title will probably add 2 missile and another bomb. And bomblet generator for thoes infinite bombs!!! plus the havoc looks cooler also if its done right it will be cross faction ship with rebles the same as firespay with both a scum and rebel nym

A ship with infinite bombs and an astromech and a turret is not going to have an attack value of 4-5 - unless it's the first ship in the game that can be loaded to 100pts on its own

6 laser cannons nyms going to be a ps9 pilot no doubt and the only one with astros and i expect the bomblet generator to cost a least 10 points on its own if not more

Bring on the Punishing One!

id have to disagree (being a starfighter fanboy) but in all onesty the havoc is a better fighter and bomber lest put it this way 4 if not 5 firepower 2 crew a bomb (maybe 2) and turret slot with 1 agility 4 hull and shield with agility hull and shield all being increased by 1 for nym not to mention with nym the crew replaced with astromech thats right 2 astromechs and lets not forget the the havoc title will probably add 2 missile and another bomb. And bomblet generator for thoes infinite bombs!!! plus the havoc looks cooler also if its done right it will be cross faction ship with rebles the same as firespay with both a scum and rebel nym

A ship with infinite bombs and an astromech and a turret is not going to have an attack value of 4-5 - unless it's the first ship in the game that can be loaded to 100pts on its own

6 laser cannons nyms going to be a ps9 pilot no doubt and the only one with astros and i expect the bomblet generator to cost a least 10 points on its own if not more

So he's better than the pilot that blew up the Death Star I?

id have to disagree (being a starfighter fanboy) but in all onesty the havoc is a better fighter and bomber lest put it this way 4 if not 5 firepower 2 crew a bomb (maybe 2) and turret slot with 1 agility 4 hull and shield with agility hull and shield all being increased by 1 for nym not to mention with nym the crew replaced with astromech thats right 2 astromechs and lets not forget the the havoc title will probably add 2 missile and another bomb. And bomblet generator for thoes infinite bombs!!! plus the havoc looks cooler also if its done right it will be cross faction ship with rebles the same as firespay with both a scum and rebel nym

A ship with infinite bombs and an astromech and a turret is not going to have an attack value of 4-5 - unless it's the first ship in the game that can be loaded to 100pts on its own

6 laser cannons nyms going to be a ps9 pilot no doubt and the only one with astros and i expect the bomblet generator to cost a least 10 points on its own if not more

So he's better than the pilot that blew up the Death Star I?

he is a couple of hundred years old during the rebellion era more importantly his species doesn't grow weaker as they grow older, bust best of all he's a priate

I don't think any of that answers the question.

Bear in mind that in this game hardened veterans are Pilot Skill 6, and ace pilots are Pilot Skill 7. Pilot Skill 8 is really something. Pilot Skill 9 hasn't been seen since Wave 2 for good reason.

Also, what's six laser cannons meant to mean? If you're saying number of guns = k(firepower) that's simply false. Utterly false. Count the guns on your ships (Lambda and Falcon in particular) and you'll see. Look up the number of guns on the Mouldy Crow on Wookieepedia.

A ship's attack value is indeed tied to its firepower, but the persistent delusion that that's somehow related to the number of barrels is something I see far too much on this forum and it's got to the point where it sets me off. Look at the guns on the X-wing compared to the TIE fighter, hell, look at the guns on the Outrider. To treat those as equivalent is outright insane.

To claim that FFG assigns attack values to ships based on counting the number of gun barrels on them and leaving it there is almost an insult to the designers.

I get you like Nym, but his ship is not the goddamn Sun Crusher.

Bear in mind that in this game hardened veterans are Pilot Skill 6, and ace pilots are Pilot Skill 7. Pilot Skill 8 is really something. Pilot Skill 9 hasn't been seen since Wave 2 for good reason.

Also, what's six laser cannons meant to mean? If you're saying number of guns = k(firepower) that's simply false. Utterly false. Count the guns on your ships (Lambda and Falcon in particular) and you'll see. Look up the number of guns on the Mouldy Crow on Wookieepedia.

A ship's attack value is indeed tied to its firepower, but the persistent delusion that that's somehow related to the number of barrels is something I see far too much on this forum and it's got to the point where it sets me off. Look at the guns on the X-wing compared to the TIE fighter, hell, look at the guns on the Outrider. To treat those as equivalent is outright insane.

To claim that FFG assigns attack values to ships based on counting the number of gun barrels on them and leaving it there is almost an insult to the designers.

I get you like Nym, but his ship is not the goddamn Sun Crusher.

not quite but its a good indicator as the only ship on small base with firepower 4 has 5 cannons most if not all 2 firpower have 2 cannons and 3 firepowers have 3/4 large ships if they are using cannon numbers as a guide would be based on individual turrets but i get what your saying but 6 heavy laser cannons is more than a phantom

Well i'd also say that they should probably leave it at PS9 for Wedge, Han, Vader and Fel.

In teems of gaming, i think Scum should probably have one PS 9 pilot on a decent ship probably (Starviper??) but it would be hard to find anyone that good on any Scum ship released!

So much for my hopes of an Imperial/Scum Skipray Blastboat heavy fighter. Love that ship.

Having just read up on where the Havoc comes from, do you guys think this means we'll be getting a Naboo N-1?

I really hope we don't get a K-wing. It's amazing to me that comic artists can be so talented and yet have so little appreciation for the exigencies of combat starship design. Things look good when they look like they make sense. Form follows function, to be all architectural about it. That K-wing's form is about as functionless as it gets. The Scurgg/Havoc/whatever is 100000 times better.

What University did you study combat starship design in, and what company have you worked for that has given you the experience to make this statement?

No. The designers have said numerous times they are staying in the GCW era. The Havoc saw action in both. After the Clone Wars you don't see Naboo starfighters at all really.

Bear in mind that in this game hardened veterans are Pilot Skill 6, and ace pilots are Pilot Skill 7. Pilot Skill 8 is really something. Pilot Skill 9 hasn't been seen since Wave 2 for good reason.

Also, what's six laser cannons meant to mean? If you're saying number of guns = k(firepower) that's simply false. Utterly false. Count the guns on your ships (Lambda and Falcon in particular) and you'll see. Look up the number of guns on the Mouldy Crow on Wookieepedia.

A ship's attack value is indeed tied to its firepower, but the persistent delusion that that's somehow related to the number of barrels is something I see far too much on this forum and it's got to the point where it sets me off. Look at the guns on the X-wing compared to the TIE fighter, hell, look at the guns on the Outrider. To treat those as equivalent is outright insane.

To claim that FFG assigns attack values to ships based on counting the number of gun barrels on them and leaving it there is almost an insult to the designers.

I get you like Nym, but his ship is not the goddamn Sun Crusher.

not quite but its a good indicator as the only ship on small base with firepower 4 has 5 cannons most if not all 2 firpower have 2 cannons and 3 firepowers have 3/4 large ships if they are using cannon numbers as a guide would be based on individual turrets but i get what your saying but 6 heavy laser cannons is more than a phantom

I mean... the YT-1300 has eight cannons? While I wouldn't object overly to a 4 firepower on the Havoc, it seems like it would be more likely to simply have a cannon slot, like the B-wing, or a Y-wing-like turret slot. As for the pilot skill, there's nothing to suggest that Nym was anything above a pretty decent pilot.

But anyway, I would rather see the Havoc and Skipray Blastboat than the darned K-wing and that HIDEOUS Punishing One. Also,if the Havoc is possible, wouldn't a Guardian Mantis (also from Starfighter) give Scum/Rebels a cloak enabled fighter?

I think you guys are expecting too much out of Scurrgs.

I think the K-Wing looks phenomenal. It looks like it was a really sturdy workhorse. All those external hardpoints and additional pods, engines, thrusters make it totally sympathetic for me. Not streamlined, not sleek at all, just really brutal and awesome. If we were in medieval warfare this would be the two-Handed Mace of weapons! A ship with character!

The Scurrg is a nice-looking ship and if we get it i don't mind. But it just looks pale in comparison, and not nearly as interesting as the K-Wing.

I think the K-Wing looks phenomenal. It looks like it was a really sturdy workhorse. All those external hardpoints and additional pods, engines, thrusters make it totally sympathetic for me. Not streamlined, not sleek at all, just really brutal and awesome. If we were in medieval warfare this would be the two-Handed Mace of weapons! A ship with character!

The Scurrg is a nice-looking ship and if we get it i don't mind. But it just looks pale in comparison, and not nearly as interesting as the K-Wing.

TBH I much prefer the cleaner lines and smoother look. It looks like it could be dropped into one of the OT films and not be noticed.

I really hope we don't get a K-wing. It's amazing to me that comic artists can be so talented and yet have so little appreciation for the exigencies of combat starship design. Things look good when they look like they make sense. Form follows function, to be all architectural about it. That K-wing's form is about as functionless as it gets. The Scurgg/Havoc/whatever is 100000 times better.

What University did you study combat starship design in, and what company have you worked for that has given you the experience to make this statement?

I get that you're upset because you like the K-wing, but if you stop to consider for a moment the form of the K-wing, you'll find that it is really not beneficial for dogfighting in any circumstance, and particularly not in space (though space seems to behave differently in Star Wars than in the real world for reasons of fun and excitement in the action). To analyze why I hold the opinion I do, let's take a look at the picture of the K-wing and then discuss it. Here is the image I'm drawing my conclusions from:

Ok, so let's talk about what we see here. My first concern for this "fighter" is the mass of the ship. A more massive ship, all other things being equal, will hold more momentum than a less massive ship. More momentum means that it is harder to change direction, and it is slower to accelerate, again, all other things being equal. I am basing this opinion of size on what appear to be twin cockpits in the front fuselage of the ship. If each of these cockpits seats a single individual, then we are talking about a fighter that is, at a minimum, about 5 times as wide as the X-wing through its fuselage. Its wingspan is also much, much larger. It has three very large engines and several smaller engines, all of which add mass to the ship. In addition, it possesses two laser cannon turrets, one with four lasers and the other with two. These turrets then contain, each, more mass than the armament of an A-wing or a TIE fighter, as you have to account for the weight of the weapon, its housing, and the turret and all the associated mechanics needed to run the turret.

So, we're dealing with a ship that is hugely overweight for a fighter. That's just a fact. This means that its maneuverability is going to be extremely poor. I think the designers recognized that, which is why they mounted turrets on it, just like the turrets you see on other, heavy, unmaneuverable craft like the B-17 or B-24 from World War II. However, the problem with the turrets mounted on the K-wing is their locations. As you see on the picture above, the K-wing sports a chin turret with four laser cannons. This chin turret is huge, and that's problematic because its mass will make the relative energy required to pitch the K-wing much higher than for ships like the X-wing which have narrow, pointed noses, or for the TIE fighter where the mass is more centralized. The other problem with the K-wing's chin turret is that it's a chin turret on a starfighter. Chin turrets exist in modern aircraft, most famously the AH-64 Apache. However, the Apache possesses a chin turret because it is primarily a ground attack aircraft, and that location gives it the best arc when shooting down at opponents on the ground. The issue with the K-wing is that being a starfighter, it doesn't do ground attack work, it attacks ships and stations, and therefore there is no real benefit to the chin turret design, and there are some serious defects. Primarily, it is positioned in exactly the wrong place for starfighter versus starfighter combat in the Star Wars Universe.

The reason for this is that in the Star Wars universe ships bank and dogfight each other much as they do in modern atmospheric combat. When you're doing this, you're very likely to be on the tail of your opponent, but to have him be somewhat "above you." Not in the sense of altitude, but merely in the sense of having to look up to see him, along your lift vector. This means, that the best gun turret for a starfighter would be like the A-wing's swivel mounts, where you can shoot up at enemies across the turn circle from you. The K-wing cannot do that with its chin turret, because the turret is slung under the fuselage and is therefore optimized for shooting at a downward angle. This makes the K-wing's forward firepower relatively ineffective in a dogfight with other ships.

Turning to the second turret, we see that it is pointed backwards, but can presumably rotate forward as well. This helps with the problem listed above, and so is better-suited for a dogfight. However, not that it only has 2 laser cannons to the other turret's 4, suggesting it is not meant to be the primary armament, which doesn't make sense given the context of space battles. Moreover, the arc of the top turret is blocked by the giant engine right behind it, meaning that the turret cannot cover the ship's vulnerable six o'clock position. Given that the ship is a poorly maneuvering beast, based on its relative mass, it is highly likely other, lighter ships will get behind it. When this happens, all they have to do is stay below the line of the top-mounted engine, and they can easily gun the brains out of the K-wing without taking fire from its turrets.

That top-mounted engine is also bad for another reason - it obscures the pilots' view of their six o'clock, so they won't even be able to see ships that are behind them. It also isn't blended into the fuselage, but stuck right on top, so it has no armor protection and is very vulnerable to enemy fire. That engine is going to take hits when the ship gets shot at, no question, and that's bad news for a K-wing which is so massive that it needs all the thrust it can get to accelerate and maneuver.

On the subject of visibility, the cockpit design is also a major failure. The pilots have big bulkheads behind the canopies, meaning they can't see behind them, and even if they could, their visibility to that side would be obscured by massive and ill-placed engines, and giant wings drooping with god-knows-what. So, they are limited to visibility forward of their three-nine line, which is dangerous because it prevents them from being able to deal with threats to the most dangerous part of a ship - its vulnerable rear.

I could continue this analysis if you like, but I think I'll leave it there for now. Suffice it to say, the K-wing is not well-designed for starfighter combat operations.

Oh and if we compare that to the Scurrg, what we see is that the top turret has a clear field of fire. It's small and relatively not massive, but can be controlled by the pilot via slaving the turret to his helmet-mounted display. The pilot's cockpit isn't perfect, but offers very reasonable visibility in all directions, save dead six o'clock, but she has a great view of what's in front of her and above her, which is crucial in a dogfight. The guns mounted into the wings are positioned properly to give maximum forward firepower, which makes it a great attack design. The engines are blended into the fuselage, where hull armor can protect them, and the whole thing is relatively sleek which would reduce its sensor signature via having a smaller cross-section with less surfaces to reflect incoming beams.

Playing devil's advocate:

Ok, so let's talk about what we see here. My first concern for this "fighter" is the mass of the ship. A more massive ship, all other things being equal, will hold more momentum than a less massive ship. More momentum means that it is harder to change direction, and it is slower to accelerate, again, all other things being equal.

But all other things aren't equal--notably, bigger ships can carry larger power plants. That is, if the increase in mass comes with a proportional increase in power, the power-to-mass ratio stays balanced.

So, we're dealing with a ship that is hugely overweight for a fighter. That's just a fact. This means that its maneuverability is going to be extremely poor. I think the designers recognized that, which is why they mounted turrets on it, just like the turrets you see on other, heavy, unmaneuverable craft like the B-17 or B-24 from World War II.

Right: the critical point is that it's not designed to be a dogfighter, but an analog to a heavy fighter or light bomber. The design definitely evokes the B-17 for me, and there are more than enough examples of two-seater, twin-engine fighter/bombers in aviation history.

However, the problem with the turrets mounted on the K-wing is their locations...

...the Apache possesses a chin turret because it is primarily a ground attack aircraft, and that location gives it the best arc when shooting down at opponents on the ground. The issue with the K-wing is that being a starfighter, it doesn't do ground attack work, it attacks ships and stations, and therefore there is no real benefit to the chin turret design, and there are some serious defects. Primarily, it is positioned in exactly the wrong place for starfighter versus starfighter combat in the Star Wars Universe.

Two things here. First, aircraft like the B-17 used their ball turrets for defense against fighters attacking from below, so it's not entirely appropriate to limit the chin turret to low-and-slow ground attacks.

And second, various depictions of the K-wing's ball turret vary drastically in its placement. You can find some canon descriptions that push it so far forward that it could feasibly have about 85 degrees of elevation above the flight vector, which would remove the "ground attack" problem entirely.

I agree that it looks kind of silly, but that's a different question.

Turning to the second turret... Moreover, the arc of the top turret is blocked by the giant engine right behind it, meaning that the turret cannot cover the ship's vulnerable six o'clock position.

Yeah, I've got nothing for this. It's just dumb.

That top-mounted engine is also bad for another reason - it obscures the pilots' view... On the subject of visibility, the cockpit design is also a major failure.

I'm much less worried about this one. Presumably the WSO isn't operating two turrets and multiple ordnance systems by visual scanning alone, so there's some kind of avionics taking care of the visibility problem.

I can agree with some of that, but I think you can agree that the Havoc or Scurrg or whatever is much better designed for the same job. It's smaller, lighter, packs a similar firepower punch, its turret design is more logical, and can be utilized by a single pilot or a weapons officer in the same tandem cockpit. (Really? Side by side cockpits? C'mon, K-wing!) The engines are better armored, the sensor profile is bound to be lower, the maneuverability and acceleration are likely better. And it looks cooler.

No. The designers have said numerous times they are staying in the GCW era. The Havoc saw action in both. After the Clone Wars you don't see Naboo starfighters at all really.

Actually, you see Naboo starfighters in Return of the Jedi now. Granted, I don't like the new edition, but the Naboo parade or whatever has Naboo starfighters, so they're clearly still flying in the GCW era.

Keep in mind that the Kwing has no hyperdrive. Which means it has to be carried into battle on carriers, and then launched. It's crew escape mechanism is the detachable crew area, which is about the same size as an Awing, which probably means it's easy pickings for any opportunistic enemy.

Keep in mind that the Kwing has no hyperdrive. Which means it has to be carried into battle on carriers, and then launched. It's crew escape mechanism is the detachable crew area, which is about the same size as an Awing, which probably means it's easy pickings for any opportunistic enemy.

That's about the size of an A-wing? Holy space cow that's a big "starfighter."

Also that that **** quad turret is a freaking TURBOLASER.

Also that that **** quad turret is a freaking TURBOLASER.

Yeah, the more I learn about the K-wing, the more I feel justified in my initial assessment. Conversely, the more I look at the Havoc, the more I like it. And the Havoc is a great name for a ship.